What is in Kelvin's Head?

Not drowning but thriving – sermon from 10 August 2014

10/08/2014

Turn your eyes upon Jesus
Look full in his wonderful face
And the things of earth will grow strangely dim
In the light of his glory and grace

When I was growing up – that’s exactly the kind of thing that I would have been singing on a Sunday morning.

And it came to mind when I was starting to think about what to say about the gospel this morning.

You see, the gospel reading that we have today tends to lead to sermons which represent that kind of mawkish sentimentality that suggests that Jesus will solve everything.

I’ve found in life that Jesus doesn’t solve everything. If he did, the world would already be a very different place.

I’ve learned that if Jesus does anything he calls us to build that better place not simply with him but with people of goodwill wherever we find them.

Turn your eyes upon Jesus.

That’s the thing about this passage – the evangelist lays on that sentiment with a trowel. Peter leaps out of the boat and starts to sink – only when he looks at Jesus is he safe. And thus, so many sermons will say – we need to fix our eyes on the saviour and all will be well.

Well, I certainly think that Jesus can be a brilliant inspiration and I look on him as Saviour and Lord.

But when I look at Jesus I find that he is looking at the world and asking me to gaze with compassion upon it with him. (more…)

compassion, Turn your eyes upon Jesus

9 responses to “More on the election”

fr dougal

20/01/2010

What arrant rot these people peddle. Can we excommunicate their adherents on grounds of un-Christian stupidity? Would “You are too stupid to be an Episcopalian” be acceptable in Canon Law?

Reply
ryan

20/01/2010

A timely and usefully corrective post, kelvin. I’ve had run ins with CI fans who merely think that *asserting* that the ‘Christian’ Institute is honest and displays integrity is some sort of compelling argument. If you search their site for “Scottish Episcopal Church” you’ll find an equally (and characteristically) dishonest story on +David and the SEC’s purported ‘split’ on gay clergy

At the risk of running afoul of Godwin’s law, the ‘Christian’ Institute pretending like their ugly ideological team didn’t *lose* the Section 28 debate reminds me, not in a good way, of Neo-Nazis petitioning the UN to refight the Battle of Stalingrad.

Reply
Tim

20/01/2010

That’ll be the SEC *two* steps ahead of the CoE and assorted story-fabricating journalists, then: “not only CAN we have women bishops, we don’t actually HAVE to!”, which is at least a balanced attitude.

Reply
David | Dah•veed

20/01/2010

Perhaps Father D, that would be insulting to stupid folks!

Reply
MurielD

20/01/2010

The national press and television channels should be ashamed of themselves. They preferred to “headline” the fact that a woman priest failed to become the UK’s first woman bishop rather than straightaway honour the man who was duly elected.
It was only on reading further down the news item that we learned that the Very Rev. Dr. Gregor Duncan had been duly elected.
That was not fair to either of them.

Reply
Jackie

20/01/2010

The Radio 4 news headline on the day was similar, and the first 3 linked articles on your link (from the Telegraph, Reuters and the Scotsman) are also similar. I must confess to having words with the radio at the time.

Reply
Martin Ritchie

21/01/2010

Something I find irritating about press coverage is the way that it has portrayed Alison Peden as “bidding” or campaigning to become bishop of Glasgow. That seems to misrepresent the process and what leadership in the church is all about. I guess it’s probably impossible to convey the subtleties of episcopal leadership in a wider culture dominated by careerist politics? Any thoughts?

Reply
Roddy

21/01/2010

The Christian (sic) Institute are a bunch of tw*ts. Treat them with the indifference and disdain they deserve.

Reply
David | Dah•veed

22/01/2010

It is very disconcerting to come here and see an ad for Sarah Palin running down the lefthand side of the page!

Reply